[From nobody Thu Jun 25 20:07:04 2026 Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 11 Oct 2025 05:47:25 +0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (2024-03-25) on buxtehude.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.2 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,PGPSIGNATURE,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 12; hammy, 144; neutral, 28; spammy, 1. spammytokens:0.938-+--view hammytokens:0.000-+--H*ct:application, 0.000-+--H*ct:protocol, 0.000-+--H*ct:micalg, 0.000-+--H*ct:signed, 0.000-+--H*ct:pgp-signature Return-path: <carles@pina.cat> Received: from mail.pina.cat ([213.167.241.144]:42534) by buxtehude.debian.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from <carles@pina.cat>) id 1v7SRw-00Epcx-2A for submit@bugs.debian.org; Sat, 11 Oct 2025 05:47:25 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: carles) by mail.pina.cat (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E38015943B for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Sat, 11 Oct 2025 05:47:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=pina.cat; s=201905; t=1760161643; bh=c1vaGmPmG4Gfjjtgoym/eYAXEFAJ2R780DuKf2l5ZhQ=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=Rh4AvndkdEPs+lrePZFnjxIaC5vf8oLPah0XGMn8JHICESrDmr3WY4m28FFAqYd+X rPshonBJY7CUrgca2K64CPaL0or8/JutUBGqmS5CAJCx88DbK3GloS7c6u/DJKooxS iDQs4sUQfBmHoO00hDZBxJ2s5+wEuJszGC3yhNwg4MfPvw06dlplMfnUWK6vWbR2Jh LSd5s1by1m6zo00qqgGpcXSXr5IMwn5H6+HIV7b2Ne/znLOwNT2eU37CndtQ6tkxUN Hwim9U2tkwqyzN0LFda22VhGAXc23kkyf7Ux4iIbOWpRAwnWYecaic63uqTjWcFJQG QGJMXMe+W7LNQ== Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pinux.Home (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBA58B20374 for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Sat, 11 Oct 2025 07:47:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: by pinux.Home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CEE42B20377; Sat, 11 Oct 2025 07:47:18 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2025 07:47:18 +0200 From: Carles Pina i Estany <carles@pina.cat> To: submit@bugs.debian.org Subject: ayatana-indicator-bluetooth: suggests gnome-bluetooth which is not in unstable Message-ID: <aOnvZhrxktknCpMj@pina.cat> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="P8N6JqdLvG9Y6u5X" Content-Disposition: inline Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org --P8N6JqdLvG9Y6u5X Content-Type: text/plain; protected-headers=v1; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2025 07:47:18 +0200 From: Carles Pina i Estany <carles@pina.cat> To: submit@bugs.debian.org Subject: ayatana-indicator-bluetooth: suggests gnome-bluetooth which is not in unstable Subject: ayatana-indicator-bluetooth: suggests gnome-bluetooth which is not= in unstable Package: ayatana-indicator-bluetooth Version: 24.5.0-3 Usertags: package-relations package-relations-suggests Severity: wishlist Dear maintainer, I see that the package ayatana-indicator-bluetooth (version 24.5.0-3) suggests gnome-bluetooth which is not in unstable. This can be seen in https://packages.debian.org/unstable/ayatana-indicator-bluetooth . Search for "Package not available". The missing package used to be in Debian but they were removed some time ago: - https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/gnome-bluetooth Should it be dropped or changed? Since I'm comenting on the topic: I also see that it suggests other packages that are not in Debian (as seen in the packages.debian.org page). There is no policy that I know of to say that suggested packages must be packaged in Debian so it's ok =66rom the policy point of view. On the other hand, there are "Dependencies" that are not in Debian (blueman-manager, ubuntu-system-settings and gnome-bluetooth) which I think that for the Debian package should be removed? piuparts didn't catch it I guess because it's installable via blueman. Thank you, --=20 Carles Pina i Estany https://carles.pina.cat | carles@pina.cat | cpina@debian.org --P8N6JqdLvG9Y6u5X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEth6/Zob9uGYomaJ+qAKIT2ClX4EFAmjp72YACgkQqAKIT2Cl X4H1XQ//SqI78xaSJx/c2g9GeQ0i8zbJUJhSjAHDiLZAMbITgziVCpA/bSANGHRa LSs6ykNT5DdpXNPL27tbA15g//V+4JEw0agAOFLSVcD1hOcH5rlAPL0kItDEf3VR S00iwIqU+/IZ4RyRrpUNSbca/GVVa1X7wW8E1N1MwFDQ0QP0gSaX0MDKdbEH9L5Z upC9Mdfb25oFrJ/igX5i5YDasAj1EyGqQLxpOJMFEePV+ppVPn+Ivkl7MKjngLV7 96UXawu+MznfnSPPL7ZsrbjWwdeZGSb3IIEIBT4YkmWRpVXzqIX1iFU6hizo0lKo rGwgKhV+g3tgMroRY4p4ssEwTmTFC2gOI95A0k7OgtWSyBum39Ng3y45g3mshtIx ULv3rjZXO2MH+LFNN6209QksnqkpBSIbOeh9q6VBxIQaXWmb2XhfOTIUC73sRF3F MwsO+dilkjtsfeNYA1/bE00S2tA3WIvtiDuBpFThmS8fxpUzd9/UXc+UuVYhFqkK fOpn/lHbj7kYsVEfjX2ZF0Q8CW4TEAN44Kk5aqxTjymjG6IwCIim7/+21M+oY6av QK5ZhU/xgnniLqyo77tw8HCO9A+MAJO3ScXtFqc15CYge3MgoPKeuonzVcgOF0Xp gBE99t0pV8kcfejBUi/BmQgthwoMYQsTpfwKxyKlYFsjTiPHsgU= =+p28 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --P8N6JqdLvG9Y6u5X-- ]